21 Mar
2003
21 Mar
'03
9:46 a.m.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 10:01:38AM +0000, Ross Paterson wrote:
I sympathize with your concern, but I'm a bit reluctant to have Hugs pretending to provide things that it really doesn't handle. I think it's better to make programmers explicitly aware of such shortcomings rather that let their programs compile and then not work.
How about abstracting the problematic bits in Network.Socket as functions wrapped in #ifdef __HUGS__, but inside that module?
Yes, that would concentrate the #ifdefs where they won't hurt. Volker (in his own #ifdef-hell) -- Volker Stolz * http://www-i2.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/stolz/ * PGP * S/MIME